New Complaint No.230 of 2023.                                                           

                                                               Date of Institution:26.10.2023.

                                                              Old Complaint No:285 of 2018.

                                                                Date of Institution: 04.07.2018.

                                                                        Date of order:01.02.2024.                                                                        

Ranjit Singh Son of Sh. Gurmit Singh, resident of VPO Chone, Tehsil Batala District Gurdaspur.

                                                                                                                          ….......Complainant.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

                                                                   VERSUS

1.       Grewal Highway Bus Service, 11/12, Opposite Senior Secondary School, Near Bus Stand, Jwahar Nagar, Ludhiana, Punjab – 141001, through its Proprietor.

2.       Sh. Baldev Randhawa, District Transport Officer / Regional Transport Authority, Gurdaspur.

3.       Kulwinder Singh alias Kinda, Conductor of Grewal Highway Bus Service, Ludhiana.

                                                                                                               ….Opposite parties.

                                     Complaint U/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act.

Present: For the Complainant: Sh.J.S. Samra, Advocate.

             For the Opposite Party No.1: Sh.K.M. Singh, Advocate.

             Opposite Party No.2:   None.

             Opposite Party No.3:   Exparte.

Quorum: Sh.Lalit Mohan Dogra, President, Sh.Bhagwan Singh Matharu, Member.

ORDER

Lalit Mohan Dogra, President.

          Ranjit Singh, Complainant (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act (here-in-after referred to as 'Act') against Grewal Highway Bus Service Etc. (here-in-after referred to as 'opposite parties).

2.       Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that the complainant is a handicapped person and having disability of 70%. Disability Certificate to this effect bearing No. GSG/89...2002 issued by the Civil Surgeon, Gurdaspur. It is pleaded that on 08.02.2018 the complainant boarded a bus of Grewal Highway Bus Service i.e. the opposite party No. 1 from Bus Stand Mehta to visit Batala in connection with some domestic work. The complainant requested the conductor to issue a half ticket from Mehta to Batala as he is a handicapped person. The complainant also showed his handicapped certificate to the conductor of the bus of the opposite party No. 1, but he refused to issue a half ticket rather he misbehaved and insulted the complainant of his disability. It is further pleaded that the conductor of the opposite party No. 1 charged full ticket from the complainant intentionally and willfully to cause wrongful loss to the complainant and the opposite party No. 3 has charged full ticket i.e. Rs.20/- from the complainant which amounts to deficiency in services on the part of the opposite parties, as according to the policy of Punjab Govt. meant for handicapped and disabled persons of the society. The opposite party No. 1 is vicariously liable for the wrongful act of the opposite party No. 3 during the course of his employment. It is further pleaded that the complainant has moved an application to Deputy Commissioner, Gurdaspur regarding the illegal act of the opposite party No. 3 and he marked the application to District Transport Office, Gurdaspur (i.e. opposite party No. 2), but the opposite party No. 2 did not take any action against Grewal Highway Bus Service Ludhiana, rather insulted the complainant that "What happened if the conductor has charged Rs.10/- more, it is a meager amount which one can pay". The act and conduct of the opposite party No. 2 was also not good toward the complainant. It is further pleaded that as per Motor Vehicle Act, it is the duty of the District Transport Officer to impound and cancel the Permit of the opposite party No. 1 with recommendation in near future no fresh permit should be issued to the Grewal Highway Bus Service Ludhiana, because buses are plied on the road not only for general people, but also for the handicapped/disabled persons, deaf and dumb, blind persons, ladies, old aged persons and children etc. on priority basis, which are not providing good services and the opposite party No. 2 has failed to comply the true spirit of the Motor Vehicle Act in accordance with law, which shows the opposite party No. 2 is in hand in glow with the opposite party No. 1 i.e. Grewal Bus Service, Ludhiana. It is further pleaded that due to this illegal act and conduct of the opposite parties the complainant has suffered loss and also suffered mental agony, Physical harassment and inconvenience. It is further pleaded that there is a clear cut deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.

          On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has alleged deficiency and unfair trade practice on the part of the opposite parties and prayed that necessary directions may kindly be issued to the opposite parties to refund Rs.10/- (Rupees Ten only) alongwith interest from the date of boarding the bus of the opposite party No. 1 till its realization. It is further prayed that the opposite parties may also be burdened with compensatory costs to tune of Rs.70,000/- (Rupees Seventy Thousands only) on account mental agony, physical harassment and deficiency in services on the part of the opposite parties alongwith litigation expenses and counsel fee of Rs.12,000/-, in the ends of justice and fair play to the humble complainant.

3.       Upon notice, the opposite party No.1 appeared through counsel and contested the complaint and filing their written reply, stating therein that the replying opposite party No.1 has no concern with the incident as alleged by the complainant in his complaint. So for as the knowledge of the replying opposite party is concerned there was no such incident happened on dated 08.02.2018 and moreover the conductor named as opposite party No. 3 was never and is still not conductor of the opposite party No. 1 bus service, which facts clearly shows if at all it will be presumed that the opposite party No. 3 has misbehaved the complainant then the opposite party No. 1 has no liability at all as the opposite party No. 3 has no concern with the replying opposite party No. 1. It is pleaded that it is wrong that on the alleged date the conductor of the opposite party No. 1 has charged full fare amounting of Rs.20/- from the complainant as alleged by him. The complainant filed the ticket for Rs.20/- of dated 08.02.2018 of the opposite party No. 1 bus service from some passenger who travelled on that day in the bus. Mere production of ticket of Rs.20/- does not prove any deficiency in service on the part of the replying opposite party No. 1 because such type of ticket can easily be procured from the passenger travelled on that day in the bus. It is further pleaded that the District Transport Office Gurdaspur rightly did not take any action on the alleged complaint of the complainant being false one. Moreover the complaint is bad for non-joining of conductor of the opposite party No. 1 bus service. On that day conductor Jagis Singh son of Amar Singh was on duty on the bus of the replying opposite party No.1.

          On merits, the opposite party No.1 denied all the averments of the complaint and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. In the end, the opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint with costs. 

4.       Upon notice, the opposite party No.2 appeared through Sh.Gurpreet Singh, Clerk and filing their written reply, stating therein that on the application submitted by the complainant and recommended by the office of Deputy Commissioner, Gurdaspur the office of the answering opposite party No. 2 called both the parties. It is pleaded that during the hearing of the application, the representative of the Grewal Highway Bus Service appeared and made a statement on dated 18.05.2018 wherein it is stated that due to the complaint against the conductor, the said conductor has been removed from the company and presently he is not working with their company. Accordingly, the said application of the complainant has been disposed off, vide order dated 29.05.2018 by concluding that this office has to take action only as per the provision of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. The action with regard to registration of case is to be taken by the police department. It is further pleaded that the replying opposite party No. 2 seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble Court to dismiss the instant complaint filed by the complainant qua the answering opposite party No.2.

          On merits, the opposite party No.2 denied all the averments of the complaint and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party. In the end, the opposite party prayed for dismissal of complaint.

5.       Opposite party No.3 did not appear despite the service of notice and was proceeded against exparte vide order dated 15.10.2018.

6.       Learned counsel for the complainant has tendered into evidence affidavit of Ranjit Singh, (Complainant) as Ex.CW-1 alongwith other documents.

7.       Learned counsel for the opposite party No.1 has tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh. Gurmeet Singh, (Manager of Grewal Highway Bus Service, Ludhiana) as Ex.OPW-1 alongwith reply.

8.       Opposite party No. 2 has filed reply.

9.       Rejoinder not filed by the complainant.

10.     Written arguments not filed by the parties.

11.     Counsel for the complainant has argued that complainant is handicapped person with 70% disability. It is further argued that on 08.02.2018 complainant had travelled in the bus of opposite party No.1 from bus stand Mehta to Batala and inspite of fact that complainant was handicapped person and conductor of opposite party No.1 was required to charge half ticket but the conductor deliberately charged Rs.20/- which is cost of full ticket in violation of the instructions which amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party No.1. it is further argued that complainant had lodged complaint with the opposite party No.2 but the opposite party No.2 also did not take any action.

12.     On the other hand counsel for the opposite party No.1 has argued that opposite party No.3 never remained conductor of opposite party No.1 and no incident of 08.02.2018 took place and the ticket has been procured by the complainant from some other person and is unnecessarily harassing the opposite party No.1.

13.     None has appeared on behalf of opposite party No.2 but it is plea of opposite party No.2 that on receiving complaint the matter was compromised and opposite party No.1 had removed the conductor from the company and opposite party No.2 can only take action as per Motor Vehicle Act and as such there is no deficiency in service and complaint is liable to be dismissed.

14.     Opposite party No.3 remained exparte.

15.     We have heard the Ld. counsels for the complainant and opposite party No.1 and gone through the record. 

16.     To prove his case complainant has placed on record his affidavit, copy of disability certificate, copy of ticket and copy of complaint to the Deputy Commissioner Gurdaspur.

17.     To prove his case complainant has placed on record copy of ticket to prove this fact that on 08.02.2018 complainant had travelled in the bus owned by opposite party No.1. The ticket placed on record is not denied by opposite party No.1 rather opposite party No.1 has taken plea that the complainant has illegally procured the said ticket from some other passenger of the bus but we are of the view that the opposite party No.1 has not shown any reason as to why the complainant will go to such extent to procure ticket from some other person and then to file complaint before this Commission, whereas on contrary opposite party No.2 has admitted this fact that opposite party No.1 had removed the conductor (OP. No.3) from the company which proves this fact that the conductor of opposite party No.1 had misbehaved with the complainant who is a handicapped person. We are of the further view that misbehaviour by the conductor of opposite party No.1 itself proves deficiency is service, as every passenger who has paid the fare whether it is full or half is entitled to respectful journey in the bus and failure to provide such service amount to deficiency in service. Moreover, opposite party No.1 has not placed on record affidavit of any such conductor or driver of the bus who were natural witness to disprove the allegations regarding the incident on 08.02.2018. Accordingly, deficiency in service on the part of opposite party No.1 is fully proved on record.

18.     Accordingly, present complaint is partly allowed and opposite party No.1 is directed to refund the amount of Rs.10/- to the complainant alongwith interest @ 9% P.A. w.e.f. 08.02.2018 till realization and pay compensation of Rs.5,000/- for mental tension, harassment and misbehaviour by conductor of opposite party No.1. Entire exercise shall be completed within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

19.     The complaint could not be decided within the stipulated period due to heavy pendency of Court Cases, vacancies in the office and due to pandemic of Covid-19.

20.     Copy of the order be communicated to the parties free of charges. File be consigned.                                                                                                                                                               

            (Lalit Mohan Dogra)

                                                                                      President.

Announced:                                                   (B.S.Matharu)

Feb. 01, 2024                                                        Member.

*YP*